Accounting for quality improvement during the conduct of embedded pragmatic clinical trials within healthcare systems: NIH Collaboratory case studies.

Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) and quality improvement (QI) activities often occur simultaneously within healthcare systems (HCSs). Embedded PCTs within HCSs are conducted to test interventions and provide evidence that may impact public health, health system operations, and quality of care. They are larger and more broadly generalizable than QI initiatives, and may generate what is considered high-quality evidence for potential use in care and clinical practice guidelines. QI initiatives often co-occur with ePCTs and address the same high-impact health questions, and this co-occurrence may dilute or confound the ability to detect change as a result of the ePCT intervention. During the design, pilot, and conduct phases of the large-scale NIH Collaboratory Demonstration ePCTs, many QI initiatives occurred at the same time within the HCSs. Although the challenges varied across the projects, some common, generalizable strategies and solutions emerged, and we share these as case studies. KEY LESSONS: Study teams often need to monitor, adapt, and respond to QI during design and the course of the trial. Routine collaboration between ePCT researchers and health systems stakeholders throughout the trial can help ensure research and QI are optimally aligned to support high-quality patient-centered care.

Incidence of statin use in older adults with and without cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus, January 2008- March 2018.

BACKGROUND: Data from randomized controlled trials and observational studies on older adults who take statins for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease are limited. To determine the incidence of statin use in older adults with and without cardiovascular disease (CVD) and/or diabetes (DM), we conducted a descriptive observational study. METHODS: The cohort consisted of health plan members in the NIH Collaboratory Distributed Research Network aged >75 years who had continuous drug and medical benefits for ≥183 days during the study period, January 1, 2008- March 31, 2018. We defined DM and CVD using diagnosis codes, and identified statins using dispensing data. Statin use was considered incident if a member had no evidence of statin exposure in the claims during the previous 183 days, and the use was considered long-term if statins were supplied for ≥180 days. Incidence rates were reported among members with and without CVD and/or diabetes, and stratified by year, sex, and age group. RESULTS: Among 757,569 eligible members, 109,306 older adults initiated statins and 54,624 became long-term users. Health plan members with CVD had the highest incidence of statin use (143.9 initiators per 1,000 member-years for CVD & DM; 114.5 initiators per 1,000 member-years for CVD & No DM). Among health plan members without CVD, those with DM had rates of statin use that were over two times higher than members without DM (76.1 versus 34.5 initiators per 1,000 member-years, respectively). Statin initiation remained steady throughout 2008-2016, was slightly higher in males, and declined with increasing age. CONCLUSION: Incidence of statin use varied by CVD and DM comorbidity, and was lowest among those without CVD. These results highlight the potential clinical equipoise to conduct large pragmatic clinical trials to generate evidence that could be used to inform future blood cholesterol guidelines.

Addressing guideline and policy changes during pragmatic clinical trials.

While conducting a set of large-scale multi-site pragmatic clinical trials involving high-impact public health issues such as end-stage renal disease, opioid use, and colorectal cancer, there were substantial changes to both policies and guidelines relevant to the trials. These external changes gave rise to unexpected challenges for the trials, including decisions regarding how to respond to new clinical practice guidelines, increased difficulty in implementing trial interventions, achieving separation between treatment groups, and differential responses across sites. In this article, we describe these challenges and the approaches used to address them. When deliberating appropriate action in the face of external changes during a pragmatic clinical trial, we recommend considering the well-being of the participants, clinical equipoise, and the strength and quality of the evidence associated with the change; involving those charged with data and safety monitoring; and where possible, planning for potential external changes as the trial is being designed. Any solution must balance the primary obligation to protect the well-being of participants with the secondary obligation to protect the integrity of the trial in order to gain meaningful answers to important public health questions.

How well does early-career investigators' cardiovascular outcomes research training align with funded outcomes research?

BACKGROUND: Outcomes research training programs should prepare trainees to successfully compete for research funding. We examined how early-career investigators' prior and desired training aligns with recently funded cardiovascular (CV) outcomes research. METHODS: We (1) reviewed literature to identify 13 core competency areas in CV outcomes research; (2) surveyed early-career investigators to understand their prior and desired training in each competency area; (3) examined recently funded grants commonly pursued by early-career outcomes researchers to ascertain available funding in competency areas; and (4) analyzed alignment between investigator training and funded research in each competency area. We evaluated 185 survey responses from early-career investigators (response rate 28%) and 521 funded grants from 2010 to 2014. RESULTS: Respondents' prior training aligned with funded grants in the areas of clinical epidemiology, observational research, randomized controlled trials, and implementation/dissemination research. Funding in community-engaged research and health informatics was more common than prior training in these areas. Respondents' prior training in biostatistics and systematic review was more common than funded grants focusing on these specific areas. Respondents' desired training aligned similarly with funded grants, with some exceptions; for example, desired training in health economics/cost-effectiveness research was more common than funded grants in these areas. Restricting to CV grants (n=132) and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded grants (n=170) produced similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying mismatch between funded grants in outcomes research and early-career investigators' prior/desired training may help efforts to harmonize investigator interests, training, and funding. Our findings suggest a need for further consideration of how to best prepare early-career investigators for funding success.

Training cardiovascular outcomes researchers: A survey of mentees and mentors to identify critical training gaps and needs.

BACKGROUND: Many young investigators are interested in cardiovascular (CV) outcomes research; however, the current training experience of early investigators across the United States is uncertain. METHODS: From April to November 2014, we surveyed mentees and mentors of early-stage CV outcomes investigators across the United States. We contacted successful grantees of government agencies, members of professional organizations, and trainees in CV outcomes training programs. RESULTS: A total of 185 (of 662) mentees and 76 (of 541) mentors completed the survey. Mentees were equally split by sex; most had completed training >3 years before completing the survey and were clinicians. Mentors were more likely women, mostly ≥20 years posttraining, and at an associate/full professor rank. Mentors reported devoting more time currently to clinical work than when they were early in their career and mentoring 2-4 people simultaneously. More than 80% of mentees started training to become academicians and completed training with the same goal. More than 70% of mentees desired at least 50% research time in future jobs. More than 80% of mentors believed that future investigators would need more than 50% time dedicated to research. Most mentees (80%) were satisfied with their relationship with their mentor and reported having had opportunities to develop independently. Mentors more frequently than mentees reported that funding cutbacks had negatively affected mentees' ability to succeed (84% vs 58%). Across funding mechanisms, mentees were more optimistic than mentors about securing funding. Both mentees and mentors reported greatest preparedness for job/career satisfaction (79% for both) and publications (84% vs 92%) and least preparedness for future financial stability (48% vs 46%) and work-life balance (47% vs 42%). CONCLUSIONS: Survey findings may stimulate future discourse and research on how best to attract, train, and retain young investigators in CV outcomes research. Insights may help improve existing training programs and inform the design of new ones.

ACC/AHA Special Report: Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation Strategies: A Summary of Systematic Reviews by the NHLBI Implementation Science Work Group: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an Implementation Science Work Group to assess evidence-based strategies for effectively implementing clinical practice guidelines. This was part of a larger effort to update existing clinical practice guidelines on cholesterol, blood pressure, and overweight/obesity. OBJECTIVES: Review evidence from the published implementation science literature and identify effective or promising strategies to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted on 4 critical questions, each focusing on the adoption and effectiveness of 4 intervention strategies: (1) reminders, (2) educational outreach visits, (3) audit and feedback, and (4) provider incentives. A scoping review of the Rx for Change database of systematic reviews was used to identify promising guideline implementation interventions aimed at providers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori for each question, and the published literature was initially searched up to 2012, and then updated with a supplemental search to 2015. Two independent reviewers screened the returned citations to identify relevant reviews and rated the quality of each included review. RESULTS: Audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care (15 of 21 reviews and 12 of 13 reviews, respectively) and clinical outcomes (7 of 12 reviews and 3 of 5 reviews, respectively). Provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness for improving both process of care (3 of 4 reviews) and clinical outcomes (3 reviews equally distributed between generally effective, mixed, and generally ineffective). Reminders showed mixed effectiveness for improving process of care outcomes (27 reviews with 11 mixed and 3 generally ineffective results) and were generally ineffective for clinical outcomes (18 reviews with 6 mixed and 9 generally ineffective results). Educational outreach visits (2 of 2 reviews), reminders (3 of 4 reviews), and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were generally effective for cost reduction. Educational outreach visits (1 of 1 review) and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were also generally effective for cost-effectiveness outcomes. Barriers to clinician adoption or adherence to guidelines included time constraints (8 reviews/overviews); limited staffing resources (2 overviews); timing (5 reviews/overviews); clinician skepticism (5 reviews/overviews); clinician knowledge of guidelines (4 reviews/overviews); and higher age of the clinician (1 overview). Facilitating factors included guideline characteristics such as format, resources, and end-user involvement (6 reviews/overviews); involving stakeholders (5 reviews/overviews); leadership support (5 reviews/overviews); scope of implementation (5 reviews/overviews); organizational culture such as multidisciplinary teams and low-baseline adherence (9 reviews/overviews); and electronic guidelines systems (3 reviews). CONCLUSION: The strategies of audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care and clinical outcomes. Reminders and provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness, or were generally ineffective. No general conclusion could be reached about cost effectiveness, because of limitations in the evidence. Important gaps exist in the evidence on effectiveness of implementation interventions, especially regarding clinical outcomes, cost effectiveness and contextual issues affecting successful implementation.

ACC/AHA Special Report: Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation Strategies: A Summary of Systematic Reviews by the NHLBI Implementation Science Work Group: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an Implementation Science Work Group to assess evidence-based strategies for effectively implementing clinical practice guidelines. This was part of a larger effort to update existing clinical practice guidelines on cholesterol, blood pressure, and overweight/obesity. OBJECTIVES: Review evidence from the published implementation science literature and identify effective or promising strategies to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted on 4 critical questions, each focusing on the adoption and effectiveness of 4 intervention strategies: (1) reminders, (2) educational outreach visits, (3) audit and feedback, and (4) provider incentives. A scoping review of the Rx for Change database of systematic reviews was used to identify promising guideline implementation interventions aimed at providers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori for each question, and the published literature was initially searched up to 2012, and then updated with a supplemental search to 2015. Two independent reviewers screened the returned citations to identify relevant reviews and rated the quality of each included review. RESULTS: Audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care (15 of 21 reviews and 12 of 13 reviews, respectively) and clinical outcomes (7 of 12 reviews and 3 of 5 reviews, respectively). Provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness for improving both process of care (3 of 4 reviews) and clinical outcomes (3 reviews equally distributed between generally effective, mixed, and generally ineffective). Reminders showed mixed effectiveness for improving process of care outcomes (27 reviews with 11 mixed and 3 generally ineffective results) and were generally ineffective for clinical outcomes (18 reviews with 6 mixed and 9 generally ineffective results). Educational outreach visits (2 of 2 reviews), reminders (3 of 4 reviews), and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were generally effective for cost reduction. Educational outreach visits (1 of 1 review) and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were also generally effective for cost-effectiveness outcomes. Barriers to clinician adoption or adherence to guidelines included time constraints (8 reviews/overviews); limited staffing resources (2 overviews); timing (5 reviews/overviews); clinician skepticism (5 reviews/overviews); clinician knowledge of guidelines (4 reviews/overviews); and higher age of the clinician (1 overview). Facilitating factors included guideline characteristics such as format, resources, and end-user involvement (6 reviews/overviews); involving stakeholders (5 reviews/overviews); leadership support (5 reviews/overviews); scope of implementation (5 reviews/overviews); organizational culture such as multidisciplinary teams and low-baseline adherence (9 reviews/overviews); and electronic guidelines systems (3 reviews). CONCLUSION: The strategies of audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care and clinical outcomes. Reminders and provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness, or were generally ineffective. No general conclusion could be reached about cost effectiveness, because of limitations in the evidence. Important gaps exist in the evidence on effectiveness of implementation interventions, especially regarding clinical outcomes, cost effectiveness and contextual issues affecting successful implementation.

Inappropriate emergency department visits and use of the Health Care for the Homeless Program services by Homeless adults in the northeastern United States.

This study tested whether the use of the Health Care for the Homeless Program (HCHP) by homeless adults was associated with reduced risk of inappropriate emergency department (ED) use. Researchers interviewed 941 homeless adults at 52 soup kitchens. Of those interviewed, 508 reported having at least 1 ED visit during the last 6 months. Then, 243 subjects' 688 ED records were retrieved. Inappropriateness of each ED use was evaluated based on clinical criteria. Logistic regressions were applied. Having two or more HCHP visits [odds ratio (OR) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19, 0.90] by homeless adults was associated with decreased odds of having inappropriate ED visits.

Use of the Health Care for the Homeless Program services and other health care services by homeless adults.

This study examined factors associated with the use of the Health Care for the Homeless Program and other health care services by homeless adults. A total of 941 homeless adults were identified in 52 soup kitchens in U.S. communities. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were applied. Among homeless adults, having dental problems was the most robust factor associated with their use of Health Care for the Homeless Program services (odds ratio [OR] = 2.50, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] = 1.44-4.32). Among homeless adults who did not visit Health Care for the Homeless Program services during last six months, the number of emergency room visits was the most powerful factor associated with their use of other health care services (OR = 1.15, 95 percent CI = 1.05-1.26). The results of the study can help health care providers better serve homeless adults to meet their health needs.

Comparison of mammography use by older black and white women.

OBJECTIVES: To identify differences in the prevalence of ever having had a mammogram and having had a recent mammogram between older black and white women and to compare factors associated with mammography use in older black and white women. DESIGN: Data analysis and comparative study using nationally representative multistage sampling survey. SETTING: Data were obtained from the 1998 National Health Interview Survey. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred forty-nine black and 3,328 white older women were examined. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome variables included never having had a mammogram (yes/no) and not having had a mammogram in the past 3 years (yes/no). RESULTS: The results of chi-square tests showed that older blacks were less likely to have ever had a mammogram than older whites, but there was no difference in having had a recent mammogram between older blacks and whites. After adjusting for other related factors, race was not related to mammography use in older blacks and whites. Health insurance was related to mammography use in older whites but not in older blacks. Family income was associated with never having had a mammogram in older whites but not in older blacks. Older blacks with less than 12 years of education were less likely to have had a mammogram (recently or ever) than older whites with less than 12 years of education. CONCLUSIONS: Even though race, per se, was not associated with mammography use in older black and white women, many barriers to mammography use between older black and white women were different or did not have similar effects. To promote mammography use in older black and white women, barriers need to be specifically targeted for each group to enhance the effectiveness of breast cancer screening programs.